[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 13/13] PCI: Deprecate pci_intx(), pcim_intx()
On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 18:45 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 10:53:16AM +0200, Philipp Stanner wrote: > > On Wed, 2024-10-16 at 10:43 +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > > > On 16.10.2024 08:57, Philipp Stanner wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2024-10-15 at 13:53 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 20:51:23 +0200 > > > > > Philipp Stanner <pstanner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > pci_intx() and its managed counterpart pcim_intx() only > > > > > > exist > > > > > > for > > > > > > older > > > > > > drivers which have not been ported yet for various reasons. > > > > > > Future > > > > > > drivers should preferably use pci_alloc_irq_vectors(). > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark pci_intx() and pcim_intx() as deprecated and encourage > > > > > > usage > > > > > > of > > > > > > pci_alloc_irq_vectors() in its place. > > > > > > > > > > I don't really understand this. As we've discussed > > > > > previously > > > > > pci_alloc_irq_vectors() is, unsurprisingly, for allocating > > > > > PCI > > > > > IRQ > > > > > vectors while pci_intx() is for manipulating the INTx disable > > > > > bit > > > > > on > > > > > PCI devices. The latter is a generic mechanism for > > > > > preventing > > > > > PCI > > > > > devices from generating INTx, regardless of whether there's a > > > > > vector > > > > > allocated for it. How does the former replace the latter and > > > > > why > > > > > do > > > > > we > > > > > feel the need to deprecate the latter? > > > > > > > > > > It feels like this fits some narrow narrative and makes all > > > > > users > > > > > of > > > > > these now deprecated functions second class citizens. Why? > > > > > At > > > > > it's > > > > > root these are simply providing mask and set or mask and > > > > > clear > > > > > register > > > > > bit operations. Thanks, > > > > > > > > I got the feeling from the RFC discussion that that was > > > > basically > > > > the > > > > consensus: people should use pci_alloc_irq_vectors(). Or did I > > > > misunderstand Andy and Heiner? > > > > > > > I think there are two different use cases for pci_intx(). > > > At first there are several drivers where the direct usage of > > > pci_intx() > > > can be eliminated by switching to the pci_alloc_irq_vectors() > > > API. > > > > > > And then there's usage of pci_intx() in > > > drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c > > > drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_header.c > > > There we have to keep the (AFAICS unmanaged) pci_intx() calls. > > > > There is also the usage within PCI itself, in MSI. Patch №8 touches > > that. > > > > It's why I think this series should land before anyone should port > > direct pci_intx() users to the irq vectors function, because the > > latter > > also uses pci_intx() and its own devres, which sounds explosive to > > me. > > > > > > I'm perfectly happy with dropping this patch and continue > > > > offering > > > > pci{m}_intx() to users, since after removing that hybrid > > > > hazzard I > > > > don't see any harm in them anymore. > > So is the bottom line that we should drop *this* patch and apply the > rest of the series? Yes Sir, that's the idea Regards, P. > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > drivers/pci/devres.c | 5 ++++- > > > > > > drivers/pci/pci.c | 5 ++++- > > > > > > 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/devres.c b/drivers/pci/devres.c > > > > > > index 6f8f712fe34e..4c76fc063104 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/devres.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/devres.c > > > > > > @@ -435,7 +435,7 @@ static struct pcim_intx_devres > > > > > > *get_or_create_intx_devres(struct device *dev) > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > /** > > > > > > - * pcim_intx - managed pci_intx() > > > > > > + * pcim_intx - managed pci_intx() (DEPRECATED) > > > > > > * @pdev: the PCI device to operate on > > > > > > * @enable: boolean: whether to enable or disable PCI INTx > > > > > > * > > > > > > @@ -443,6 +443,9 @@ static struct pcim_intx_devres > > > > > > *get_or_create_intx_devres(struct device *dev) > > > > > > * > > > > > > * Enable/disable PCI INTx for device @pdev. > > > > > > * Restore the original state on driver detach. > > > > > > + * > > > > > > + * This function is DEPRECATED. Do not use it in new code. > > > > > > + * Use pci_alloc_irq_vectors() instead (there is no > > > > > > managed > > > > > > version, currently). > > > > > > */ > > > > > > int pcim_intx(struct pci_dev *pdev, int enable) > > > > > > { > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > > index 7ce1d0e3a1d5..dc69e23b8982 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c > > > > > > @@ -4477,11 +4477,14 @@ void pci_disable_parity(struct > > > > > > pci_dev > > > > > > *dev) > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > /** > > > > > > - * pci_intx - enables/disables PCI INTx for device dev > > > > > > + * pci_intx - enables/disables PCI INTx for device dev > > > > > > (DEPRECATED) > > > > > > * @pdev: the PCI device to operate on > > > > > > * @enable: boolean: whether to enable or disable PCI INTx > > > > > > * > > > > > > * Enables/disables PCI INTx for device @pdev > > > > > > + * > > > > > > + * This function is DEPRECATED. Do not use it in new code. > > > > > > + * Use pci_alloc_irq_vectors() instead. > > > > > > */ > > > > > > void pci_intx(struct pci_dev *pdev, int enable) > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |